Yesterday, Mathematics Today published a paper discussing a model designed to predict what kind of tattoos stand the test of time. According to the New Scientist, Ian Eames (a researcher at University College London) created the mathematical model "to predict how tattoos should change over long
periods--up to 20 years--by modeling the way skin cells shunt the
ink particles around."
Eames says of his findings:

Broadly speaking, what my paper shows is that the small details in a
tattoo are lost first, with thicker lines being less affected. Although
finely detailed tattoos might look good when they are first done, they
tend to lose their definition after 15 years -- depending on how fine the
lines are.

I know what you're saying: "Tell me something I don't know, Marisa." But I think it's particularly interesting in light of debates in the industry over whether certain tattoos will hold up. In countless interviews I've done with artists, the issue arises. There's little to no disagreement over the strong outlines & bold color tenets. The question centers around tattoos that don't follow those rules. If there is no line work, will contrast, shading and color saturation, for example, be enough. Many say, hell yeah and just as many whom I've spoken with say hell no. Maybe this model will add something to the debate.